Are SWATs in the US mostly used for serving marijuana warrants?

Question

I've seen following claims made by pro-legalization lobby:

• SWATs are used more often for drug warrants than to deal with any violent crimes
• most of these warrants are for marijuana
• significant number of people are killed during these SWAT raids

How true are these claims?

As for reference, some of such claims are contained in this article by Gawker: "SWAT Team Raids House, Shoots Dogs over 'Small Amount of Marijuana'":

As Balko points out, there are as many as 100 of these terrifying paramilitary raids per day in the U.S., conducted under the aegis of "the war on drugs," theoretically targeting drug traffickers and other "enemies." Some of the raids turn up significant amounts of illegal substances; others turn up even less than the "small amount of marijuana" the police were able to find at Whitworth's house. Many wind up targeted innocent people. This map of "botched raids" gives some indication of the disturbing frequency not just of the operations themselves, but the mistakes, often fatal, that occur during their execution.

---

To address some of the doubts expressed in the comments:

• definition of violent crime (according to FBI UCR): "composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force." (source)
• as for significant number of people killed: comparison with number of people killed by criminals in home invasions would be great.

Answer 1

SWATs are used more often for drug warrants than to deal with any violent crimes

An ACLU report © 2014 titled War Comes Home -- The Excessive Militarization of American Policing says that in their statistical study of 800 SWAT deployments conducted by 20 law enforcement agencies during the years 2011-2012, 62% were for drug searches (including marijuana).

Answer 2

Are SWATs use more often for drug warrants than for violent crimes?

The following evidence shows that during felony drug investigations, no-knock warrants are sought by law enforcement, and that the dichotomy between drug warrants and violence is not universally accepted.

---

In the US, the type of warrant that SWAT is best suited for is a no-knock warrant. A no-knock search is reasonable when officials have a reasonable suspicion that announcement of their presence would result in destruction of evidence or threat to the officer(s) executing the warrant.

In Brief for Americans for Effective Law Enforcement, Inc as Amicus Curiae, Richards v. Wisconsin, 520 U.S. 385 (1997), Americans for Effective Law Enforcement argued that:

in search warrant cases involving felonious drug charges, the risk of injury or death to the executing officers is so great that in this class of cases the officers are constitutionally excused from the knock and announce requirement

However, this argument for a blanket exception was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in Richards v. Wisconsin, who held that warrants must be obtained on a case-by-case basis. The fourth amendment "does not permit a blanket exception to the knock-and-announce requirement in the case of all warrants executed in felony drug investigations".

Nonetheless, the argument of American for Effective Law Enforcement highlights the standard practice of seeking a no-knock warrant when executing a search or seizure related to felony drug charges.

The amicus brief and the decision also show that not everybody agrees with the dichotomy between felony drug charges and violence that you present in your premise. The United States Supreme Court has recognized "the fact that felony drug investigations may frequently present [circumstances presenting a threat of physical violence or where officers believe that evidence would be destroyed if advance notice were given]".

Are most drug-related no-knock search warrants for marijuana?

Are a significant number of people killed during the execution of no-knock search warrants?